Bree Mobley
Sustainability Problems
Mrs. Kim Fortune
18 October 2011 Debate Paper: Does comedy news enhance political and environmental literacy?
Having origins that date back to the beginning of widespread news, comedy news has always had a significant impact on people’s reception of information. Comedy news can be defined as news satire, relying heavily on irony and deadpan humor. Within the last 2 decades comedy news has become increasingly popular; for some completely replacing their other news sources. With emergence of the television shows like the Daily Show with Jon Stewart and Colbert Report, and the online newspaper satire, the Onion, 16% of Americans, in a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press in April of 2007, said they regularly consorted to these news resources. With this percentage nearly matching the 17% of Americans who said they regularly watch Fox News, the substantive news reported through this popular medium is often in question in terms of political and environmental literacy.
In the NY Magazine article “America Is a Joke”, the writer Chris Smith defends that the Daily Show with Jon Stewart is effectively communicating political and media issues to America. Smith observes that because media and the public view of politicians have changed, the medium by which news is spread has an opportunity to change as well. Comedy news is riding the wave of media transformation: “Print is crumbling. The mainstream TV networks have steadily shed seriousness and viewers” (Smith, 1). In conjunction with this, America’s politicians often seem like actors or reality stars created by cable producers (Smith, 1). Upon this shift in media and general change in attitude towards government and political figures, Jon Stewart has made himself into a leading critic and satirist of the media-political complex. Covering anything from the Fox News star, Glenn Beck, to exposing anti-mosque demagogues, to the Obama legislative administration, to the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, to Washington Post front page headliners, Stewart is there with a pun and a “kick in the nuts” (Smith, 1). Smith defends that Jon has more cultural influence than his conventional talk-show competitors, and most conventional journalists for that matter. According to Wikipedia, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart has nearly 2 million viewers each night, airing four days a week. Despite its selective coverage of mostly political news, more people discuss issues spoken about and joked about on the Daily Show more often than that of news on conventional networks.
Even though the Daily Show with Jon Stewart has a strong following, as presented by the writer Chris Smith, there are multiple holes in his argument. Smith narrows in on the opinion of Glenn Beck, a Fox News cast member. Beck is known to dismiss Stewart as a mere entertainer; “[Jon] is more interested in being funny than trying to actually understand the key messages in [my] show…”(Smith, 2). This statement is made even more interesting when Smith included a quote by Steward saying, “…I admire Fox. They’re great broadcasters. Everything is pointed, purposeful.” This statement makes it seem as if Stewart and Beck are not in the same category of news reporters, as if they’re the opposite and not comparable. Stewart also admits to creating more meaningful and comedic material about more serious issues. This alludes to perhaps a changing of the news or a masking of the news in order to generate a good joke. Stewart is quoted to say “Maybe the nice thing about being a comedian is never having a full belief in yourself to know the answer…you’re going ‘But of course, I’m fucking idiotic.’ It’s why we don’t lead a lot of marches.” Now this is an interesting statement from Jon, he seems to admit that he does not intend to take responsibility for the news he is supplying. . Smith writes that Stewart is still clinging to the naïve hope that the legitimate news media will get its act together and become a resolute force for truth and good government (Smith, 2). This statement suggests Jon does not take responsibility for what he’s saying. Perhaps the Daily Show does not provide political news, but rather augments the information; it is generally known that a base of political knowledge and keeping up with current events are key strategies in better following Jon’s jokes. You have to have received news from a different medium in order to understand comedy news. In addition, Jon is admittedly a left-of-center Democrat. Granted his jokes are bi-partisan, but having a known political view could greatly influence the information he is feeding his audience. It should also be noted that the content of comedy news presented on the Daily Show is predominantly politically or media driven, leaving little opportunity to talk about other pressing news issues. The structure in which the article by Chris Smith was written does not lend to a professional, news-worthy subject either. The article includes racy quotes from Jon Stewart and his fellow writers as they brainstorm and prepare for an episode. It also talks about a series of political events that occurred early on in Jon Stewart’s career on the Daily Show that assisted his popularity. The Bust-Gore recount of 2000 created the running joke “Indecision 2000”; there were endless jokes to be made dealing with the recount and Gore’s concession. September 11 also helped generate a strong following for Stewart: he became “a voice of comic sanity in the whirlwind of real and manufactured fear” (Smith, 3). American politics seem to be becoming more and more comical. Perhaps due to a positive feedback relationship it has with the emergence of comedy news; regardless, comedy news might very well be just comedy. The article “America Is a Joke” presents a decent argument for the importance and impact of the comedy news, specifically coming from the Daily Show, however; it does not convincingly provide proof that comedy news enhances political and environmental literacy.
The negative side to this argument is represented in the blog post “The ‘Jon Stewart Game’: Everybody Loses, Except Him” written by Matt Welch for the Blog for Reason Magazine. Welch’s main girth in his article comes from a different article in the Esquire that generated other journalistic viewpoints and reviews. The long read “Jon Stewart and the Burden of History” written by Tom Junod examines the evolution of the Jon Stewart as the host of the Daily Show. Junod and Welch argue that Jon Stewart has an unnecessary influence, and one could even go so far as to say control, over American politics because he can never be challenged. Over the last decade, Stewart has risen from late-night comedian to the liberal conscience of America. Despite this population consensus, Stewart still denies his power, denies having an impact: he says, “The satirist depends on shame, and everyone knows that our culture has become shameless…” He started as a comedian but as political times got messy and country moral dropped [after September 11th], Jon saw an opportunity to become a voice of the people. As long as there is evidential corruption in politics, money, and media in American found in the form of videos and interview clips, Steward will be there to take the position of the national conscience. He’s playing the devil’s advocate; nothing can possibly be going right, moral, and just. By falling back on the persona of a comedian, Stewart is avoiding the harsh hand of people just like himself: “…he’s not saying what he actually is, because then he’d be judged. And Jon Stewart, to a degree unique in the culture, exists outside the realm of judgment” (Junod). The opinion of Junod and Welch also present the personal agenda that Jon Stewart secretly keeps. For example, his mock political rally with Stephen Colbert in October 2010, “The Rally to Restore Sanity”, was more of a gathering of his own personal fans for his own personal moral than it was a gathering to present political clarity. It was held three days before the midterm elections and was planned to counteract Stewart’s arch nemesis Glenn Beck’s organized rally at the Mall two months earlier. The article published in the Enquire might not have clearly been an attack on Jon Stewart’s methods of presentation, but the muted mockery provided by Junod made it so.
There are a few holes in the argument that Tom Junod makes and Matt Welch defends. It is easy to see upon reading Junod’s article that his opinion of Jon Stewart is not particularly high. This is unfortunate to realize seeing as the article was a large spread in a well-informed, widely read magazine, The Enquirer. In the article Junod is put off by the public’s trust in Jon and his nightly program; this is not something that should be upsetting. The simple fact that the Daily Show is pulling in millions of viewers each evening to discuss political issues is something to be credited. In 2004, 58% of Americans voted in the presidential election. This was 5 years after Jon Stewart started his show, could this allude to a correlation? By creating a comedic outlet in politics, Stewart has cultivated an audience that agrees not necessarily on his point of view, but agrees by his presence in politics and media. When Junod points to Jon Stewart’s declining sense of humor, it can be defended that Jon is serious when speaking of serious issues, like September 11th or the Virginia Tech shootings. Stewart echoes the opinion of many Americans in his choices on when to joke and when not to joke. The article by Tom Junod and followup blog post by Matt Welch linger too much on a personal opinion of Jon Stewart and his influence of political culture and not enough on the substance and awareness he provides.
For my third reference, I chose to move in a direction away from political comedy news. The article “Don’t Just Skewer News, Go Make Up Your Own” written by Neil Genzlinger was published in the New York Times newspaper this past January following the reveal of a news network reporting from The Onion. The Onion is an American news satire organization that includes a traditional newspaper and website. The new “Onion News Network” takes the approach of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart a step further; rather than turning real events into objects of humor, the Onion’s network is taking fabricated events and public figures to generate a following. The article defends that “pure fabrication is perfectly fine, because after decades of 24-hour-news saturation the public mind is crammed full of reporting clichés just waiting to be invoked and ridiculously juxtaposed.” The network’s tag line is, appropriately, “News without mercy.” Now this might be reaching the limit of comedy news; can an audience really be sustained if all that is being presented is completely faux information? This article reflects in a way upon the aforementioned articles; it takes all the jokes that Jon Stewart creates and appropriates them to events that have not occurred. Hard to tell whether the Onion News Network will gain as many followers as it’s fellow comedy news counterparts, Stephen Colbert, Saturday Night Live Weekend Update, and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart; only time will tell if America is ready for a fictional news source.
After researching the debatable issue of ‘does comedy enhance political and environmental literacy?’, it is hard to speak strongly on either side of the argument. Specifically, it was difficult to find relevant articles on the issue. I could not find a strong negative argument that was not simply a reporter tearing down a single example of comedy news. That is partly the reason my articles specifically mention Jon Stewart; I could not find a credible, in-depth account of comedy news as a whole. Now my opinion of the matter is that comedy news is effective in the wide-spread distribution of awareness of current events. It creates a common ground for discussion of current events and political figures which can be appreciated by every American involved. However, to say that comedy news enhances political and environmental literacy, that is more of a stretch. Most comedy news does not touch upon subjects beyond politics, pop culture, media, and money, so environmental literacy is out of the question. Whether Americans gain political insight from watching political comedy news is easier to defend. I believe people who expose themselves to shows like The Daily Show and the Colbert Report give themselves with a different perspective on the issue. Armed with two different views of the matter, people are more likely to make their own opinion and to further their research on the matter. Comedy news is effective in improving literacy in this light.
Sustainability Problems
Mrs. Kim Fortune
18 October 2011
Debate Paper: Does comedy news enhance political and environmental literacy?
Having origins that date back to the beginning of widespread news, comedy news has always had a significant impact on people’s reception of information. Comedy news can be defined as news satire, relying heavily on irony and deadpan humor. Within the last 2 decades comedy news has become increasingly popular; for some completely replacing their other news sources. With emergence of the television shows like the Daily Show with Jon Stewart and Colbert Report, and the online newspaper satire, the Onion, 16% of Americans, in a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press in April of 2007, said they regularly consorted to these news resources. With this percentage nearly matching the 17% of Americans who said they regularly watch Fox News, the substantive news reported through this popular medium is often in question in terms of political and environmental literacy.
In the NY Magazine article “America Is a Joke”, the writer Chris Smith defends that the Daily Show with Jon Stewart is effectively communicating political and media issues to America. Smith observes that because media and the public view of politicians have changed, the medium by which news is spread has an opportunity to change as well. Comedy news is riding the wave of media transformation: “Print is crumbling. The mainstream TV networks have steadily shed seriousness and viewers” (Smith, 1). In conjunction with this, America’s politicians often seem like actors or reality stars created by cable producers (Smith, 1). Upon this shift in media and general change in attitude towards government and political figures, Jon Stewart has made himself into a leading critic and satirist of the media-political complex. Covering anything from the Fox News star, Glenn Beck, to exposing anti-mosque demagogues, to the Obama legislative administration, to the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, to Washington Post front page headliners, Stewart is there with a pun and a “kick in the nuts” (Smith, 1). Smith defends that Jon has more cultural influence than his conventional talk-show competitors, and most conventional journalists for that matter. According to Wikipedia, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart has nearly 2 million viewers each night, airing four days a week. Despite its selective coverage of mostly political news, more people discuss issues spoken about and joked about on the Daily Show more often than that of news on conventional networks.
Even though the Daily Show with Jon Stewart has a strong following, as presented by the writer Chris Smith, there are multiple holes in his argument. Smith narrows in on the opinion of Glenn Beck, a Fox News cast member. Beck is known to dismiss Stewart as a mere entertainer; “[Jon] is more interested in being funny than trying to actually understand the key messages in [my] show…”(Smith, 2). This statement is made even more interesting when Smith included a quote by Steward saying, “…I admire Fox. They’re great broadcasters. Everything is pointed, purposeful.” This statement makes it seem as if Stewart and Beck are not in the same category of news reporters, as if they’re the opposite and not comparable. Stewart also admits to creating more meaningful and comedic material about more serious issues. This alludes to perhaps a changing of the news or a masking of the news in order to generate a good joke. Stewart is quoted to say “Maybe the nice thing about being a comedian is never having a full belief in yourself to know the answer…you’re going ‘But of course, I’m fucking idiotic.’ It’s why we don’t lead a lot of marches.” Now this is an interesting statement from Jon, he seems to admit that he does not intend to take responsibility for the news he is supplying. . Smith writes that Stewart is still clinging to the naïve hope that the legitimate news media will get its act together and become a resolute force for truth and good government (Smith, 2). This statement suggests Jon does not take responsibility for what he’s saying. Perhaps the Daily Show does not provide political news, but rather augments the information; it is generally known that a base of political knowledge and keeping up with current events are key strategies in better following Jon’s jokes. You have to have received news from a different medium in order to understand comedy news. In addition, Jon is admittedly a left-of-center Democrat. Granted his jokes are bi-partisan, but having a known political view could greatly influence the information he is feeding his audience. It should also be noted that the content of comedy news presented on the Daily Show is predominantly politically or media driven, leaving little opportunity to talk about other pressing news issues. The structure in which the article by Chris Smith was written does not lend to a professional, news-worthy subject either. The article includes racy quotes from Jon Stewart and his fellow writers as they brainstorm and prepare for an episode. It also talks about a series of political events that occurred early on in Jon Stewart’s career on the Daily Show that assisted his popularity. The Bust-Gore recount of 2000 created the running joke “Indecision 2000”; there were endless jokes to be made dealing with the recount and Gore’s concession. September 11 also helped generate a strong following for Stewart: he became “a voice of comic sanity in the whirlwind of real and manufactured fear” (Smith, 3). American politics seem to be becoming more and more comical. Perhaps due to a positive feedback relationship it has with the emergence of comedy news; regardless, comedy news might very well be just comedy. The article “America Is a Joke” presents a decent argument for the importance and impact of the comedy news, specifically coming from the Daily Show, however; it does not convincingly provide proof that comedy news enhances political and environmental literacy.
The negative side to this argument is represented in the blog post “The ‘Jon Stewart Game’: Everybody Loses, Except Him” written by Matt Welch for the Blog for Reason Magazine. Welch’s main girth in his article comes from a different article in the Esquire that generated other journalistic viewpoints and reviews. The long read “Jon Stewart and the Burden of History” written by Tom Junod examines the evolution of the Jon Stewart as the host of the Daily Show. Junod and Welch argue that Jon Stewart has an unnecessary influence, and one could even go so far as to say control, over American politics because he can never be challenged. Over the last decade, Stewart has risen from late-night comedian to the liberal conscience of America. Despite this population consensus, Stewart still denies his power, denies having an impact: he says, “The satirist depends on shame, and everyone knows that our culture has become shameless…” He started as a comedian but as political times got messy and country moral dropped [after September 11th], Jon saw an opportunity to become a voice of the people. As long as there is evidential corruption in politics, money, and media in American found in the form of videos and interview clips, Steward will be there to take the position of the national conscience. He’s playing the devil’s advocate; nothing can possibly be going right, moral, and just. By falling back on the persona of a comedian, Stewart is avoiding the harsh hand of people just like himself: “…he’s not saying what he actually is, because then he’d be judged. And Jon Stewart, to a degree unique in the culture, exists outside the realm of judgment” (Junod). The opinion of Junod and Welch also present the personal agenda that Jon Stewart secretly keeps. For example, his mock political rally with Stephen Colbert in October 2010, “The Rally to Restore Sanity”, was more of a gathering of his own personal fans for his own personal moral than it was a gathering to present political clarity. It was held three days before the midterm elections and was planned to counteract Stewart’s arch nemesis Glenn Beck’s organized rally at the Mall two months earlier. The article published in the Enquire might not have clearly been an attack on Jon Stewart’s methods of presentation, but the muted mockery provided by Junod made it so.
There are a few holes in the argument that Tom Junod makes and Matt Welch defends. It is easy to see upon reading Junod’s article that his opinion of Jon Stewart is not particularly high. This is unfortunate to realize seeing as the article was a large spread in a well-informed, widely read magazine, The Enquirer. In the article Junod is put off by the public’s trust in Jon and his nightly program; this is not something that should be upsetting. The simple fact that the Daily Show is pulling in millions of viewers each evening to discuss political issues is something to be credited. In 2004, 58% of Americans voted in the presidential election. This was 5 years after Jon Stewart started his show, could this allude to a correlation? By creating a comedic outlet in politics, Stewart has cultivated an audience that agrees not necessarily on his point of view, but agrees by his presence in politics and media. When Junod points to Jon Stewart’s declining sense of humor, it can be defended that Jon is serious when speaking of serious issues, like September 11th or the Virginia Tech shootings. Stewart echoes the opinion of many Americans in his choices on when to joke and when not to joke. The article by Tom Junod and followup blog post by Matt Welch linger too much on a personal opinion of Jon Stewart and his influence of political culture and not enough on the substance and awareness he provides.
For my third reference, I chose to move in a direction away from political comedy news. The article “Don’t Just Skewer News, Go Make Up Your Own” written by Neil Genzlinger was published in the New York Times newspaper this past January following the reveal of a news network reporting from The Onion. The Onion is an American news satire organization that includes a traditional newspaper and website. The new “Onion News Network” takes the approach of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart a step further; rather than turning real events into objects of humor, the Onion’s network is taking fabricated events and public figures to generate a following. The article defends that “pure fabrication is perfectly fine, because after decades of 24-hour-news saturation the public mind is crammed full of reporting clichés just waiting to be invoked and ridiculously juxtaposed.” The network’s tag line is, appropriately, “News without mercy.” Now this might be reaching the limit of comedy news; can an audience really be sustained if all that is being presented is completely faux information? This article reflects in a way upon the aforementioned articles; it takes all the jokes that Jon Stewart creates and appropriates them to events that have not occurred. Hard to tell whether the Onion News Network will gain as many followers as it’s fellow comedy news counterparts, Stephen Colbert, Saturday Night Live Weekend Update, and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart; only time will tell if America is ready for a fictional news source.
After researching the debatable issue of ‘does comedy enhance political and environmental literacy?’, it is hard to speak strongly on either side of the argument. Specifically, it was difficult to find relevant articles on the issue. I could not find a strong negative argument that was not simply a reporter tearing down a single example of comedy news. That is partly the reason my articles specifically mention Jon Stewart; I could not find a credible, in-depth account of comedy news as a whole. Now my opinion of the matter is that comedy news is effective in the wide-spread distribution of awareness of current events. It creates a common ground for discussion of current events and political figures which can be appreciated by every American involved. However, to say that comedy news enhances political and environmental literacy, that is more of a stretch. Most comedy news does not touch upon subjects beyond politics, pop culture, media, and money, so environmental literacy is out of the question. Whether Americans gain political insight from watching political comedy news is easier to defend. I believe people who expose themselves to shows like The Daily Show and the Colbert Report give themselves with a different perspective on the issue. Armed with two different views of the matter, people are more likely to make their own opinion and to further their research on the matter. Comedy news is effective in improving literacy in this light.
Works Cited
Genzlinger, Neil. "Don’t Just Skewer News, Go Make Up Your Own." Arts - Television - The New York Times. New York Times, 20 Jan. 2011. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://tv.nytimes.com/2011/01/21/arts/television/21onion.html>.
Junod, Tom. "Jon Stewart Profile - Jon Stewart and the Burden of History - Esquire." Esquire Magazine. Esquire Magazine, 15 Sept. 2011. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://www.esquire.com/features/jon-stewart-profile-1011>.
Smith, Chris. "America Is a Joke." New York Magazine. New York Magazine, 12 Sept. 2011. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://nymag.com/arts/tv/profiles/68086/>.
Welch, Matt. "The "Jon Stewart Game": Everyone Loses, Except Him! - Hit & Run." Web log post. Reason Magazine. 19 Sept. 2011. Web. 18 Oct. 2011. <http://reason.com/blog/2011/09/19/the-jon-stewart-game-everyone>.